CGHSFOA Accounting Conference May 19, 2017 State Allocations CGHSFOA Accounting Conference May 19, 2017

The Principal Allocations Child Welfare Allocation Core Services Allocation Colorado Works (TANF) Allocation Child Care Assistance Program Allocation County Administration Allocation Adult Protective Services Allocation

Allocation Committees Two Committees are created in Statute Child Welfare Allocation Committee Child Welfare Services and Core Services Allocations Works Allocation Committee (TANF/Colorado Works) Other allocations are the responsibility of the CDHS Executive Director Operated through the PAC/Sub-PAC structure County Admin, APS, Child Care

Child Welfare Allocation Committee Works Allocation Committee Two separate committees created in statute with the same structure for membership Eleven Members on each Committee Eight members from Counties One from each (CCI) Region (5 Regions) Three from the CCI Large County Caucus (22 Counties) County with the largest caseload must be represented Three members from CDHS Executive level person Program expert Financial/Budget expert

Child Welfare Services Allocation

Child Welfare Allocation The allocation methodology is still under review for SFY – 2017-18 as of the date of the CGHSFOA Conference.

Core Services Allocation

Core Services Allocation The committee – CWAC Statutes are somewhat ambiguous about CWAC role Determination was made by the CDHS Executive Director to use CWAC as a group of advisory stakeholders for CORE allocations Allocation Model – Historical Prior to SFY-13, the Core Services Allocation was based on the original amounts awarded to counties at the inception of the program, in the early 1990’s, plus additional allocations made at several points in time when additional funding became available.

Core Services Allocation Allocation Model – Current The first step in the annual allocation identifies the individual county amounts and the statewide total for Enhanced Funding for Evidence-Based Services and BOS Mental Health/Substance Abuse services. (preserve historical dollar amounts) The remaining appropriation is then split between the Ten Large Counties and the Balance-of-State Counties.

Core Services Allocation Allocation Model – Current The amount awarded to each county in SFY-12 for Evidence-Based Enhanced Funding Services, was allocated, in the same amounts, for SFY-16 The amount awarded to each Balance-of-State county in SFY-12 for Substance Abuse Services and Mental Health Services was allocated to each Balance-of-State county for SFY-16.

Core Services Allocation Allocation Model – Current Beginning with SFY-13, the remaining appropriation was divided between the Ten-Large Counties (~73%) and the Balance-Of-State Counties (~27%) in the same proportion as had resulted in SFY-12 FOR SFY-14, the proportion of the total appropriation was adjusted to 75% for the Ten Large Counties and 25% for the Balance –of-State Counties Currently, the split is approximately 78% for the Ten Large Counties and 22% for the Balance-of-State counties

Core Services Allocation Allocation Model – Current: The remaining appropriated funds are divided between the Ten Large Counties, and the Balance-of-State Counties to follow two separate operations. In each of the TLC and BOS operations, the county allocations are based upon the following five cost driver categories A) Households Below 200% of Poverty 45% --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B) Referrals (2.75%) (actually, 5% of remaining 55%) C) Assessments (5.5%) (actually, 10% of remaining 55%) 55% D) Involvements (44%) (actually 80% of remaining 55%) E) Out-Of-Home Placements (2.75%) (actually, 5% of remaining 55%)

Core Services Allocation Allocation Model – Current Each county’s allocation from the five Cost Driver Categories is compared to a “Floor” equal to: 90% for the Ten Large Counties (10% floor) 85% for the Balance-of-State Counties (15% floor) of the SFY-15 allocation or $25,000, whichever is larger.

Core Services Allocation Allocation Model – Current Weights are applied to preliminary allocation results for counties designated by CDPHE as “Rural” (110%) and Frontier” (115%) The application of the Floor and the Weighting for Rural and Frontier Counties requires that all county allocation calculations from the model be adjusted to “true-down” to the available funding. The resulting calculations for each of the five Cost Driver Categories are added to the dollar-amount calculations (above) to arrive at each county’s preliminary allocation

County Administration Allocation

County Admin Allocation Utilizes the framework of a Workload Study done by Deloitte in 2007 Activity-Based Costing (ABC) Methodology Structure of Primary Activities to represent workloads Average number of minutes to complete each activity Uses data from CBMS – number of activities, by County Examples: Completed application intakes, Failed Interactive Interviews, Redeterminations completed, Denials/Discontinuations issued, Inter-county transfers Also uses county-reported data regarding EBT activities Allocates funds appropriated to CDHS and HCPF

County Admin Allocation Allocation Model Data from CBMS and County EBT data to count quantities of activities completed, by County Multiply count of each activity times the minutes it takes from the Workload Study Sum each counties total “minutes”; convert to percent of State total minutes Each county is allocated the percent of available appropriation If the above does not calculate at least $105,329 for a County, that County’s allocation is elevated to that number (Base Allocation)

County Admin Allocation County Admin Allocation at Close-Out Surplus Distribution – unspent allocations are moved to overspent counties Federal Pass-thru – acts as an increase to allocation Any remaining county deficits are eligible for federal pass thru. Federal Revenue earned based on statewide expenditures (but not covered within appropriations) increases allocation available.

Adult Protective Services Allocation

Adult Protective Services Allocation Formula developed by a Task Group formed under the Finance Sub-PAC - Spring of 2013 Initial allocation followed County Admin method SFY-2014-15 was the first year of an independent formula SFY-2017-18 recommendations adopted by PAC earlier in May

Adult Protective Services Allocation 10 Large Counties Workload Data 50% of Allocation Data extracted from the CAPS system “Case-Days” - - Sum of number of days each case is open in CAPS Demographic Data 50% of Allocation Data from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) Population 55 years and older and under 300% FPL

Adult Protective Services Allocation Balance of State Counties tend to have greater fluctuations with demographic and caseload data Higher Demographics tend to mitigate fluctuations

Adult Protective Services Allocation Balance of State Counties Workload Data 55% of Allocation Data extracted from the CAPS system “Case-Days” - - Sum of number of days each case is open in CAPS Demographic Data 45% of Allocation Data from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) Population 55 years and older and under 300% FPL

Adult Protective Services Allocation Two Segments of funding – Administration and Client Services Both segments use the same basic formula. For The Administrative Allocation: 5% floor - County allocation cannot decrease more than 5% from year-to-year No minimum allocation for APS Admin Client Services Allocation follows the same demographic and caseload weightings as the Administrative Allocations: No Allocation Floor $2,000 minimum base for all Counties

Adult Protective Services Allocation Closeout of the client services funding is “vertical” Essentially, a Surplus Distribution between counties Unspent Client Services funding statewide is reverted Close out of APS Administration is “vertical” Surplus Distribution between counties Unspent APS Administration funding will be added to County Admin surplus distribution

Colorado Works (TANF) Allocation

Colorado Works Allocation The Committee – Works Allocation Committee The $150 million Colorado Works Block Grant appropriation is divided into six Cost Driver Factors (four demographic factors and two expenditure factors) and are weighted for their relative significance. The data to be used in calculating each of the six factors is to be the most recent available data.

Colorado Works Allocation Allocation Formula Demographic Factors 50% of the total formula, divided evenly between the four factors: represent the population most likely to participate A) Child Poverty Population (12.5%) B) # of Children Enrolled in SNAP (12.5%) C) # of Children Enrolled in SNAP Whose Family Income is below 50% of the Fed Poverty Limit (12.5%) D) # of Children enrolled in Medicaid/CHP# (12.5%)

Colorado Works Allocation Allocation Formula Expenditure Factors 50% of the total formula Represent the economics of county expenditures A) County Expenditures in the Previous SFY on Basic Cash Assistance (BCA) and State Diversion (30%) B) County Expenditures in the Previous SFY on All Other Colorado Works Block Grant Activities (20%)

Colorado Works Allocation Allocation Formula Counties who expended greater than 70.9% of their total Colorado Works expenditures in the previous SFY on Basic Cash Assistance and State Diversion are awarded the greater of the amount calculated or a minimum allocation of 140% of the amount they spent on BCA and State Diversion. Counties are held to a maximum decrease of 5% from their prior year allocation and to a maximum increase of 25% over their prior year allocation (unless increase is driven by BCA calculation, above) Counties with allocations less than $100,000 are kept from any allocation reduction.

Child Care Assistance Program Allocation

Child Care Allocation The allocation methodology is still under review for SFY – 2017-18 as of the date of the CGHSFOA Conference.

Other Funding Child Welfare Collaborative Management (“1451”) Allocations to participating counties Option to retain General Fund savings Employment First Title XX Training Chafee Independent Living Promoting Safe and Stable Families Single Entry Point Contracts SafeCare HCPF – Medicaid Outreach and Development Grants Project or Goal-Oriented Grants Child Support Services – retained collections and incentives Recoveries – retained collections and incentives Other County-based funding

State-based data systems are used for producing data that drives allocations. Accurate and complete data recording is essential !!!